38 tayangan

Diunggah oleh mlucian73

- Sensitivity Analysis of Bread Production at Anifowose Bakery Industry, Offa, Nigeria
- European Journal of Operational Research Volume 90 Issue 1 1996 [Doi 10.1016%2F0377-2217%2894%2900246-0] a.B.M. Zohrul Kabir; Ahmed S. Al-Olayan -- A Stocking Policy for Spare Part Provisioning Under
- 12-Introduction to Discrete Optimization
- Paper - Optimal Placement of PMUs Using Improved Tabu Search for Complete Observability and Out-Of-Step Prediction
- Chapter13 - Agreggate Planning
- 04237330
- ESP Well Optimizer Workflow
- Power tunnels and penstocks_The economic re-examined - Fahlbusch.pdf
- Modeling and Maximizing Customer Equity
- A Review and Critique on Integrated Production Distribution Planning Models and Techniques
- D1,L9 Linear Programming.ppt
- IRJET-Optimisation of Draw-Bead Design in Sheet Metal Forming of an Asymmetric Part using RSM and LSDYNA
- Economic Load Dispatch Problem with Valve – Point Effect Using a Binary Bat Algorithm
- Teori Pit Optimalisasi
- A Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model for Advanced Earthwork Allocation Planning
- Assembly Line Balancing
- Article
- LQR otimo
- 4325-12263-1-PB.pdf
- EE16.pdf

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

Laser Tracker Multilateration

Jorge Santolaria, Ana C. Majarena, David Samper, Agustn Brau, and Jess Velzquez

Departamento de Ingeniera de Dise no y Fabricaci on, Edifcio Torres Quevedo, EINA, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50018 Zaragoza, Spain

Correspondence should be addressed to Jorge Santolaria; jsmazo@unizar.es

Received 27 August 2013; Accepted 3 November 2013; Published 29 January 2014

Academic Editors: G. Huang and D. Veeger

Copyright 2014 Jorge Santolaria et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,

which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

A new procedure for the calibration of an articulated arm coordinate measuring machine (AACMM) is presented in this paper.

First, a self-calibration algorithm of four laser trackers (LTs) is developed. Te spatial localization of a retrorefector target, placed

in diferent positions within the workspace, is determined by means of a geometric multilateration system constructed from the

four LTs. Next, a nonlinear optimization algorithm for the identifcation procedure of the AACMM is explained. An objective

function based on Euclidean distances and standard deviations is developed. Tis function is obtained from the captured nominal

data (given by the LTs used as a gauge instrument) and the data obtained by the AACMM and compares the measured and

calculated coordinates of the target to obtain the identifed model parameters that minimize this diference. Finally, results show

that the procedure presented, using the measurements of the LTs as a gauge instrument, is very efective by improving the AACMM

precision.

1. Introduction

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in

AACMMs because of their advantages in terms of accuracy,

portability and suitability for inspection and quality control

tasks in machining tool processes and in the automotive and

aerospace industry [1].

Nevertheless, few researches have focused on the cali-

bration of these mechanisms. Moreover, there is an absence

of standards on verifcation and calibration procedures. For

that reason, AACMM manufacturers have developed its own

evaluation procedures. Tese evaluation methods are based

on the three main standards for performance evaluation in

current CMMs, UNE-EN ISO 10360, ASME B89.4.1, and

VDI/VDE 2617 and are still carried out today to compare and

evaluate the accuracy of an arm from the point of view of

the CMMs. In [1], the author presented a procedure to check

the performance of coordinate measuring arms by calculating

the distances between the centers of diferent spheres. Te

results obtained were compared with the application of the

ANSI/ASME B89 volumetric performance test showing good

agreement between the two approaches and a cost reduction.

In [2], Shimojima et al. presented a new method to estimate

the uncertainty of a measuring arm using a tridimensional

gauge. Tis method consists of a fat plate with 9 spheres fxed

at three diferent heights with respect to the metallic surface

of the plate. Ten the spheres centers are measured with

the measuring arm at diferent locations and orientations,

and distances between spheres centers are compared to the

nominal distances to evaluate the measuring performance of

the arm. Other works have been found in the literature whose

main goal is also to evaluate the performance of measuring

arms [35].

However, the AACMM presents diferent characteristics,

and diferent verifcation procedures are therefore required.

A point clearly defnes a position of the three machine

axes for a CMM. Nevertheless, the possible positions of the

AACMM elements to achieve a fxed point defned in the

measurement volume are practically infnite. Moreover, for

CMMs, evaluation tests can be performed to extract the

positioning errors, allowing correction models to be imple-

mented [1]. Tus, a high level of maintenance of the physical-

mathematical relations between the error model parameters

and the error physically committed by the machine can be

achieved. However, the application of these models does not

make sense in AACMMs, given the difculty of directly

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

e Scientic World Journal

Volume 2014, Article ID 681853, 11 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/681853

2 Te Scientifc World Journal

relating the error committed with the model parameters,

which are obtained by using optimization procedures.

Te calibration procedure consists of identifying the geo-

metric parameters in order to improve the model accuracy.

Tis procedure allows us to obtain correction models to

establish corrections in the measurements results and to

quantify the efects of the infuence variables in the fnal

measurement. To achieve this goal, the following fve steps are

usually carried out: determination of the kinematic model by

means of nonlinear equations, data acquisition, optimization

or geometric parameter identifcation, model evaluation, and,

fnally, identifcation of the error sources and implementation

of correction models.

Te frst step, determination of the kinematic model, con-

sists of obtaining the non-linear equations that relate the joint

variables to the position and orientation of the end-efector

and the initial values of nominal geometric parameters. One

of the most widely used geometric methods for modelling a

mechanism is the well-known Denavit-Hartenberg method

[6], which models the joints with four parameters. One of the

limitations of this method appears in those mechanisms that

present two consecutive parallel joint axes. In this case, an

infnite number of common normals of the same length exist,

and the location of the axis coordinate systemmay be defned

arbitrarily. Some studies [710] present methods to obtain a

complete, equivalent, and proportional model.

Te number of parameters is fxed when the kinematic

model is determined, and this value will depend on the

selected method. Moreover, there are a maximum number of

parameters that must be identifed, and the model accuracy

does not have to improve by adding extra parameters [11].

In this work, the author determined that four parameters

must be considered for each revolute joint, two of which must

be orientational, and for a prismatic joint two orientational

parameters are necessary, applied about the noncollinear

axes before and perpendicular to the translational joint axes.

Nongeometric errors are usually compensated by adding

parameters in the geometric model [12].

Te second step is data acquisition. Any measurement

error of the external instrument is propagated to the results

of the identifed parameters. For that reason, an instrument

for data acquisition should be, at least, one magnitude order

more accurate than the mechanism whose parameters are

going to be identifed.

A direct geometric transformation can be established,

providing the global reference system can be measured by

means of an external measurement instrument such as a

laser tracker or a coordinate measuring machine. In this way,

this transformation obtains the coordinates of the measured

points in the global reference system of the mechanism.

Tus, direct comparisons in the objective function, between

nominal and measured data, can be made.

However, this relation is not usually easy to obtain

through a direct measure, and the problem is usually solved

by means of least-square methods. Tese methods allow us

to obtain an approximation of this transformation, and this

approximationwill depend onthe confgurations used indata

acquisition and on the mechanism error in the evaluated

points [13].

Te home position is a position, within the AACMM

working range, where all joint angles have a predefned

value. Te displacements of the probe are usually measured

with respect to this defned position. In [14], Kovac and

Frank developed a high precision gauge instrument for the

parameter identifcation procedure and evaluation tests.

Te determination of the number of required specifc

positions is not generalizable from one AACMM to another,

since the errors committed by each arm will depend on their

confguration and assembly defects. Te performance of tests

that characterize the infuence of each joint on the fnal error,

to fnally choose positions in accordance with this infuence,

must therefore be carried out before defning the capture

positions to identify the kinematic parameters. Te positions

selected for the identifcation procedure should cover the

maximum joint rotation range to cover the infuences of all

the measuring armelements in the workspace. In [15], Zheng

et al. obtained the spatial error distribution model by using

support vector machine theory.

Te third step is optimization or geometric parameter

identifcation, and the objective is to search for the optimum

values of all parameters included in the model that minimizes

the error in the performed measurements. Tis step is usually

carried out by means of approximation procedures based

on least-square ftting. Tis function can be defned as the

quadratic diference of the error (obtained between the mea-

sured value and the value computed by the kinematic model).

Te increment established for parameters must be defned for

each iteration. In most of the cases, numerical optimization

techniques are used to minimize the error. Te Levenberg-

Marquardt (L-M) [16] method is one of the most widely used

techniques to solve the numerical optimization algorithm.

Tis method usually presents lower computational cost,

providing a solution closer to the optimum solution for the

set of parameters considered. Moreover, the L-M algorithm

solves numerical problems that appear in other numerical

optimization techniques such as those based on the gradient

or on the least-square methods such as the Gauss-Newton.

A multiobjective optimization scheme is developed in [17] to

solve the nonlinear optimization problem. In [18], Santolaria

et al. presented a kinematic parameter estimation technique,

which allows us to improve the repeatability of the AACMM

by more than 50%. Tis technique uses a ball bar gauge to

perform the data acquisition procedure.

Te fourth step, the model evaluation, consists of evalu-

ating the mechanism behavior with the set of the identifed

parameters obtained in the geometric parameter identifca-

tion procedure, in confgurations diferent from those used

in the optimization process. In [19], Koseki et al. evaluated

the accuracy of a mechanism by means of a laser tracking

coordinate measuring system.

Finally, an identifcation of the error sources and a

modelling and implementation of the correction models can

be optionally performed.

In [20], Piratelli-Filho et al. developed a virtual sphere

plate, having a standard deviation of around 0.02 mm and

a measurement uncertainty from 0.02 to 1.64 m in point

measurements, to evaluate the measurement performance of

AACMMs. Te AACMM performance test using the virtual

Te Scientifc World Journal 3

sphere plate resulted in a mean error of 0.023 mm and a

standard deviation of 0.039 mm.

Alaser tracker is a large-scale measuring instrument with

highaccuracy. Tese mechanisms are consideredvery reliable

[21]. Consequently, laser trackers have been used recently

instead of other traditional methods such as theodolites or

collimators in multiple applications such as robot tracking,

testing, calibration, and maintenance. Tese systems use

interferometry for measuring relative distances and optical

encoders in order to measure azimuth and elevation angles

of a beam-steering mirror. Te interferometer measurements

are obtained relative to the starting point. Besides, this beam

must track the positions of a retrorefector. A plane mirror

mounted on a high precision universal joint defects the

beam and hits the retrorefector. Tis element consists of

three perpendicularly oriented plane mirrors, and the beamis

refected parallel. Teoretically, the laser beam hits the center

point of the retrorefector. When there is no relative move-

ment between the laser tracker head and the retrorefector,

there is no parallel displacement between the emitted and

the refected beam. However, when the retrorefector starts

moving, there is a displacement of the refected laser beam,

since, in this case, the laser beam does not hit the center

point of the retrorefector. In [22], Lin and Her used a laser

tracker systemto measure the volumetric errors of a precision

machine. Te technique presented is based on the ASME

B5.54 standards and ofers a quick method to characterize

these errors. Tis measuring instrument can also be used in

multilateration for verifcation of machine tools, as presented

in [23], where the error order can also be in the error range of

a laser tracker. In [21], a laser tracker was used also to analyse

the performance of an indoor GPS.

Te multilaterationtechnique is a procedure whichcanbe

usedtoimprove the mechanismaccuracy. Tis methodallows

us to reduce the measurement uncertainty by eliminating the

angular noise. To achieve this, the multilateration obtains

the half point position starting from data of several laser

trackers, located in diferent positions [24]. In [25], Zhang

et al. presented specifc recommendations for optimization

of multilateration set-ups and measurement plans and for

minimizing measurement uncertainty. Besides, the authors

evaluated the volumetric measurement error propagation,

obtaining an average standard deviation of length mea-

surements around 1.2 m. Hughes et al. [26] presented a

laser-interferometric measuring station and obtained the

displacement measurement uncertainty, which was used to

predict a volumetric uncertainty for a multilateration system,

consisting of eight measuring stations and four targets. Te

combined uncertainty of the measuring station displacement

measurements and the CMM repeatability obtained was

around 200 nm. In [27], Kim et al. developed a volumetric

interferometer system and minimized least-square errors

by ftting the measured values to a geometric model of

multilateration, obtaining a volumetric uncertainty of less

than 1 m.

Te aim of this work is to improve the accuracy of an

AACMM by means of a new calibration procedure based

on laser tracker multilateration. Although both instruments

present the same order of magnitude with respect to the

accuracy, the multilateration techniques allow us to capture

points with an uncertainty much smaller than the one

obtained with an AACMM. Te points captured from the

multilateration are therefore considered as nominal data in

the calibration procedure of the AACMM.

2. AACMM Kinematic Model

Te AACMM kinematics relates the joint variables and the

probe position for any arm posture.

Te direct kinematic model is used to calculate the

positioning and orientation of the AACMM probe on the

basis of certain values of the joint variables, according to the

following:

= (

, ) , (1)

with = 1, . . . , for an arm with rotating joints.

is given

by the vector of the joint variables and represents the model

defned, which depends on the parameter vector .

Te non-linear equation system to model the mechanism

can be developed by applying the Denavit-Hartenberg (D-H)

method[6] toevery chaininthe mechanism. Tis methodhas

been widely used in mechanism modelling [28, 29] and uses

four parameters (distances

, and angles

) to model

the coordinate transformation between successive reference

systems. Te homogenous transformation matrix between

frame and 1 depends on these four parameters:

1

=

,

,

,

,

=

[

[

[

[

[

cos

cos

sin

sin

sin

cos

sin

cos

cos

sin

cos

sin

0 sin

cos

0 0 0 1

]

]

]

]

]

.

(2)

Te AACMM model used in this work is a Faro Platinum

Arm having seven axes, with a nominal value of 2 in the

single point articulation and performance test of 0.030 mm

according to the specifcations of the manufacturer.

Figure 1 shows the reference systems usedinthe AACMM

model.

Te armglobal transformationmatrix allows us toexpress

the probe sphere center coordinates with respect to the base

of the AACMM. Tis matrix can be obtained by calculating

successive coordinate transformations by premultiplying the

transformation matrix between a frame and the previous one,

as shown in the following:

[, , , 1]

AACMM

=

0

6

[, , , 1]

Probe

. (3)

In this equation, 0 is the global reference system of the

base and 6 corresponds to the reference frame that moves

with the rotation of the last joint.

A reference system is usually defned in the probe.

However, the aim of this study is to obtain the sphere center

4 Te Scientifc World Journal

X

0

Y

0

Z

0

X

4

Y

4

Z

4

X

5

Y

5

Z

5

X

6

Y

6

Z

6

X

7

Y

7

Z

7

X

3

Y

3 Z

3

X

2

Y

2

Z

2

X

1

Y

1

Z

1

Figure 1: AACMM reference systems.

coordinates of the static probe, so this reference system is

not necessary. Seven reference systems are used to model the

AACMM. Te last reference system is located in the center

of the refector and is oriented as reference system six. Tus,

the number of parameters for the 6 degrees of freedom (Dof)

AACMM is 28. Te kinematic model is fully described in

[18]. Table 1 shows the initial values for the AACMM D-H

parameters.

3. Multilateration System

Te multilateration technique allows us to reduce the mea-

surement uncertainty by eliminating the angular noise. To

achieve this, the multilateration obtains the weighted-point

position by means of several laser tracker data, located in

diferent positions. A minimum of three measurements of

each point is necessary. Each laser tracker measures the

distance from the laser tracker to the target points. Tese

measurements present a noise having a radial component and

two angular components. Te aim of the multilateration is to

decrease the measurement uncertainty, so this technique only

uses the radial component of the laser tracker measurements,

allows us to decrease the global uncertainty. Tese compo-

nents defne a sphere. Te intersection of the three spheres

obtained by measuring the same point by three laser trackers

provides two points. Equations from (4) to (6) provide the

spheres obtained by the measurements of each laser tracker,

respectively. Consider

2

0

= (

1

)

2

+ (

1

)

2

+ (

1

)

2

, (4)

2

1

= (

2

)

2

+ (

2

)

2

+ (

2

)

2

, (5)

2

2

= (

3

)

2

+ (

3

)

2

+ (

3

)

2

. (6)

Te knowledge of the locations of the reference systems of

the laser trackers allows us to obtain the following equations:

=

(

2

0

2

1

+

2

2

)

2

1

,

(7)

Reector (X, Y, Z)

m

3

P

3

(X

3

, Y

3

, Z

3

)

m

0

m

2

m

1

P

2

(X

2

, Y

2

, 0)

P

0

(0, 0, 0)

P

1

(X

1

, 0, 0)

Figure 2: Coordinates of the four laser tracker reference systems

expressed in the multilateration system.

=

(

2

0

2

2

+

2

2

+

2

2

2

2

)

2

2

,

(8)

= (

2

0

2

2

)

1/2

.

(9)

Inthis work, for simplicity, the unknownreference system

location of the three laser trackers has been defned as

(0, 0, 0), (

1

, 0, 0), and (

2

,

2

, 0) with respect to the multilat-

eration reference system.

A fourth laser tracker can be used to avoid the sign

ambiguity in the coordinate obtained in (9). Te reference

system of this laser tracker is given by (

3

,

3

,

3

). Tis point

should belong to a plane diferent from the plane formed

by the other three laser tracker reference systems as shown in

Figure 2. In this fgure,

represents LT

the laser trackers. Te origin of the multilateration global

reference system is given by

0

.

Te (, , ) target coordinates are obtained in linear

matrix form by operating (7), (8), and (9), as expressed in the

following:

[

[

]

]

= 0,5

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

1

1

0 0

2

1

2

0

(

3

3

) + (

2

3

)

3

3

1

3

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

]

[

[

[

[

[

2

1

2

0

2

1

2

2

2

0

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

0

2

3

2

3

2

3

]

]

]

]

]

.

(10)

Te multilateralized coordinates, obtained in (10), will be

considered as the nominal coordinates in the identifcation

parameter procedure.

4. Data Acquisition

Te data acquisition step consists of capturing the nominal

coordinates in the workspace of the AACMM. Te suitable

number of positions is not generalizable from one measuring

Te Scientifc World Journal 5

Table 1: Initial values for the AACMM D-H parameters.

Joint

(mm)

(mm)

1 90 90 40 300

2 135 90 40 0

3 180 90 34 590

4 90 90 34 0

5 90 90 34 588

6 180 90 34 0

7 0 0 0 318.2

LT

4

: FARO ION

LT

2

: API T3

LT

1

: FARO X

LT

3

: LEICA LT-600

Retroreector

AACMM

Figure 3: LTs and AACMM distribution used in tests.

arm to another, since each measuring arm error will depend

on their confguration and assembly defects. Te identifca-

tion procedure should cover the maximum range of joint

rotation to consider all the infuences of the measuring arm

elements.

In this study, a cloud of points located within the

arm workspace was measured simultaneously with both the

AACMM (measured values) and four LTs which conform

to the multilateralized system (nominal values). Te laser

tracker FARO model was used as LT

1

, API T3 as LT

2

,

LEICA LT-600 as LT

3

, and FARO ION as LT

4

. Te positions

were distributed throughout the workspace of the arm and

reached diferent arm angle values. Te LTs were distributed

forming the multilateration global coordinate system, as it

was detailed in Section 3. LT

function of the refector visibility, thus forming a spatial angle

as near as possible to 90

uncertainty is lower in this position, as demonstrated in a

previous work [30]. Te AACMM has been arranged in a

position that maximizes the visibility of the LTs, as shown in

Figure 3.

Te AACMM data acquisition technique is usually per-

formed by means of discrete contact probing of surface points

of the gauge in order to obtain the center of the spheres

from several surface measurements. Te time required for

the capture of positions is high, and therefore, identifcation

120

X

center

, Y

center

, Z

center

L

P

r

o

b

e

45

120

is generally carried out with a relatively low number of arm

positions. In this work, a probe presented in [18], capable

of directly probing the center of the spheres of the gauge

without having to probe surface points, has been used. Tis

probe consists of three tungsten carbide spheres of 6 mm in

diameter, laid out at 120

Figure 4.

Te probe usedallows us to defne a probe withzero probe

sphere radius and with a distance from the position of the

housing to the center of the probed refector sphere of 1.5

inches, allowing direct probing of the sphere center when the

three spheres of the probe and the sphere are in contact.

One of the advantages of this type of probe is that

the massive capture of arm positions can be performed

corresponding to several points of the workspace, whichleads

to save a considerably amount of time.

23 positions of the retrorefector were measured, from

which 21 positions were considered in the parameter iden-

tifcation process (identifcation positions) and the other 2

positions were kept for the parameter evaluation procedure

(test positions). A sofware developed captured the AACMM

measurements, saving the AACMM joint angles,

. Tese

angles and the AACMM parameters are the input to the

kinematic model. Te solution of the non-linear equations by

the L-Malgorithmobtains the measured point coordinates in

the AACMM reference system.

Te data acquisition procedure was performed trying to

capture data in symmetrical trajectories in the retrorefector

to minimize the efect of probing force on the gauge.

Although the measuring of the retrorefector center with

the kinematic mount probe from diferent arm orientations

should result in the same point measured, the unsuitable

value of the nominal kinematic parameters of the model will

be shown by way of a probing error, resulting in diferent

coordinates for the same measured point in diferent arm

orientations. For that reason, fve measurements were taken

for eachpoint and the meanpoint of the set of points captured

was considered as the center of the retrorefector measured in

the AACMM reference system, as shown in Figure 5.

Te distance between the diferent retrorefector mea-

sured positions can be obtained from the points captured

by means of the Euclidean distance between each pair of

retrorefector positions, obtaining

AACMM

, where and

represent two measured positions.

At the same time, the four LTs simultaneously measured

the distance from the captured point to the local coordinate

system.

6 Te Scientifc World Journal

X

c

, Y

c

, Z

c

=

X

i

, Y

i

, Z

i

X

i

, Y

i

, Z

i

Figure 5: Retrorefector center.

Diagonal distances are obtained according to the follow-

ing:

= + , (11)

where is the incremental output of the displacement

transducer used and is the ofset, which should be calibrated

before the multilateration implementation.

Te self-calibration and determination of the parameter

can be carried out by capturing some additional objective

measurements in some diferent positions. By performing

the quadrilateration objective point times, the number of

equations is given by 4 as shown in the following:

(

)

2

= (

)

2

= (

)

2

+ (

)

2

+ (

)

2

,

(12)

for = 0, . . . , 3 and = 0, . . . , 1.

Te system unknowns are the four ofsets,

, and the

position of the coordinates,

(3 unknowns). To

identify the four references, 12 unknowns, corresponding

to

unknowns is given by 3 + 16.

Te unknowns can be obtained by the least-square

method to minimize the error.

Te multilateration technique must solve the objective

function defned by

=

21

=1

4

=1

[(

LT

)

2

+ (

LT

)

2

+ (

LT

)

2

(

+

LT

)

2

] ,

(13)

where (

in the multilateration reference system, (

LT

,

LT

,

LT

) is

the origin of the LT

reference system,

distances for every point in the LT

LT

represents the LT

the multilateration technique was solved by means of the L-

M algorithm, and the solution obtained gives the following

information:

(i) the point coordinates in the multilateration system:

(

)|

SR Multi

,

(ii) the laser tracker ofsets:

LT

,

(iii) the origin of the reference systems for the four laser

trackers in the multilateration system: (

LT

,

LT

LT

)|

SR Multi

.

Te calculated distances between each pair of retrorefec-

tor positions can be obtained from the point coordinates in

the multilateration system, obtaining

Multi

, where and

represent the two positions.

5. Parameter Identification Procedure

Once the data acquisition technique has been carried out, the

parameter identifcation procedure can be performed.

Figure 6 shows a scheme of the calibration procedure.

Te origin of the laser trackers was measured with respect

to the reference systemof LT

1

. Tis reference systemhas been

considered the multilateration reference systemfor obtaining

the initial values of the LT

reference systems.

Te kinematic parameter identifcation procedure can be

performed starting from the measured and calculated dis-

tances (obtained as explained in Section 4). Te parameters

considered in the AACMM kinematic model are given by

(

,

0

,

Enc

), where

Enc

are the angles measured by

the encoder. Te model obtained is a non-linear equation

system, and it was solved by the L-Malgorithm. Te objective

function defned in this step considers both the measured and

calculated distances, as shown in

=

=1,=1

[(

AACMM

Multi

)

2

] +

=1

[

2

+

2

+

2

] ,

(14)

where represents the number of positions considered

in the parameter identifcation procedure and (

sured in each position and each coordinate, showing the

infuence of the volumetric accuracy and point repeatability.

6. Calibration Results

In the optimization process, the distances from each point to

every point are taken into account, obtaining 253 distances

between the 23 points.

Te multilateration procedure described above was car-

ried out based on the 23 captured points for each LT

corresponding to the refector positions used. Table 2 shows

the results obtained. As the initial values for this procedure,

null values were assigned for the ofsets of all LTs, and for the

origin points the corresponding coordinates were those that

better ft the distribution observed taken from the measured

home points of LT

2

, LT

3

, and LT

4

fromLT

1

, where the origin

of the multilaterized reference system is located.

In Figure 7, the coordinates of the captured points by

each LT and the coordinates of the multilaterated points,

Te Scientifc World Journal 7

Measuring each point with the

AACMM coordinates

Direct model

(D-H)

End

End

Home

Initial values

Multilateration

Measuring each point with all the LT

AACMM coordinates

Parameter identifcation

m

ij

(x

LTj

, y

LTj

, z

LTj

)

SR LT1

(x

LTj

, y

LTj

, z

LTj

)

SR multil.

I

LTj

I

LTj

initial

AACMM:

i

(21 positions, 5 measurements

for each position)

(x

i

, y

i

, z

i

)

SR multil.

(x

i

, y

i

, z

i

)

SR AACMM

d

ij multil. d

ij AACMM

For iter = 1 to (F

error

< tolerance)

For i, j = pos ini to pos fnal

=

21

i=1,j=1

[(d

ij

AACMM

d

ij

multil

)

2

+

n

i=1

[

2

x

+

2

y

+

2

z

]

Optimisation: to minimize F

error

Calculation of the geometric parameters: S

i

values

=

21

i=1

4

j=1

[(x

i

x

LTj

)

2

+ (y

i

y

LTj

)

2

+ (z

i

z

LTj

)

2

(m +

ij

l

LTj

)

2

]

F

error

= [E

1

. . . E

pos final

]

Figure 6: Scheme of the calibration procedure.

used as nominal coordinates in the parameter identifcation

procedure of the AACMM, are shown graphically.

As stated before, in order to introduce redundancy in

the objective function and thereby restrict to the nominal

points the fnal points obtainedwiththe identifedparameters

of the measuring arm, all possible distances between the

multilaterated points are calculated. Tis way, we can obtain

253 distances, which will be used as nominal data in the

objective function (14) in the identifcation procedure. In

Figure 8, the range of each of the calculated distances in the

measurements made by the four LTs can be observed. Tus,

each data represents the diference between the maximum

and minimum values of each considered distance calculated

from the set of the 4 LTs measured data. Te distances are

arranged starting from position 1 of the retrorefector. Te

maximum range value obtained by calculating the distances

with the 4 LTs was 105 m, while the mean range for all set of

distances was 43 m.

Following the scheme presented in Figure 6, we can

calculate all possible distances between spheres as well as

the standard deviations measured with the AACMM from

the saved angular data obtained during the data capture

process and the set of initial parameters of the AACMM

mathematical model shown in Table 1. In accordance with

the optimization for the identifcation scheme presented in

Figure 6, the quality indicators for the set of initial parameters

of the AACMM model are shown in Table 3. Moreover,

Table 3 shows inits frst columnthe distances maximumerror

obtained for all the refector points and the index of the points

that determine the distance in which the maximum error is

calculated.

Analogously, the mean distance errors for all the evalu-

ated distances are also shown. With respect to the standard

deviation, Table 3 shows, besides the maximum and mean

values, the index of the point and its corresponding coordi-

nate where the greater value is obtained, since in this case the

objective function considers the standard deviation for each

coordinate independently. As expected, the obtained values

are high, considering the initial set of parameters defned for

the AACMM mathematical model.

In the objective function proposed in (14), the data

capture setup described for = 21 refector points, it is

necessary to consider the elimination of the terms where =

to avoid both the inclusion of null terms and duplicate of

8 Te Scientifc World Journal

Table 2: Multilaterated ofsets and origin coordinates obtained in multilateration reference system. 2798 iterations and objective function

value below 1 m.

Ofsets (mm)

Origin coordinates (mm)

LT

LT

LT

LT1

LT1

1.51695 0 0 0

LT2

LT2

0.89275 2262.33138 0 0

LT3

LT3

0.18749 1713.00335 2098.93521 0

LT4

LT4

2.13351 1913.00558 343.41959 3010.23578

Table 3: Quality indicators for the initial values of model parameters over 21 SMR locations (105 AACMM positions).

Distance error (mm) 2 by retrorefector point (mm)

Maximum 38.50723 Maximum 22.00413

Causing dist. 410 Causing point 17

Medium 17.28859 Causing coord. X

Medium 8.17533

Table 4: Identifed values for the AACMM model parameters by L-

M algorithm.

Joint

(mm)

(mm)

1 89.1269 89.9216 42.4313 300

2 134.7734 89.7178 41.7885 1.2337

3 184.2704 90.1202 28.9084 591.2423

4 95.4182 89.5364 29.4449 0.6300

5 88.0773 89.9482 28.5745 591.5284

6 181.0832 92.5750 27.5479 12.2143

7 0.2117 0 0.4124 254.0575

distance errors noting that

deviation, each coordinate deviation for every one of the

refector positions is considered. To express mathematically

the optimization problem it is required to consider the sum

of the calculated quadratic errors. Tis way, through the

objective function in (14), we obtain 231 terms corresponding

to the distance errors for the 21 refector points, plus 63

standard deviation terms of these points, obtaining a total

of 294 terms to determine the objective function value in

each iteration of the optimization algorithm. Tis value will

contain the infuence of the kinematic parameters and the

articulation variables considering for this the terms related

on the one hand to volumetric precision and on the other to

repeatability, for the 105 measuring arm captured positions.

In Figure 9, it can be observed graphically the distribution of

the captured points in the AACMM reference system, before

and afer the optimization procedure, while Table 4 shows

the identifed parameters starting from the initial values of

Table 1.

From the identifed parameters (Table 4), Table 5 shows

the error characteristics results obtained for each of the

captured points considering in this case these parameters.

Te validation and generalization of the error results cal-

culated for the set of identifed parameters over the captured

data, to the rest of the AACMM work volume, imply in the

more restrictive case obtaining error and deviation values less

than the maximum values obtained in this case (Table 5) for

any evaluated position of the measuring arm. For this reason,

the assessment of the AACMM error in diferent positions

to the ones used in the identifcation procedure is highly

recommended. As shown in Table 5, a maximum error of

118 m and a mean error of 48 m for the measuring volume

have been obtained, considering the 21 nominal points used

in the identifcation. In normal operation of the measuring

arm in this work volume, it is expected to get error values

close to the mean value and obtaining maximumerror values

only in certain arm confgurations.

As a last step of the identifcation procedure, it is

necessary to evaluate the set of parameters obtained in

diferent arm positions from those considered in its own

identifcation procedure, such that it is possible to conclude

that the error results can be considered reliably within the

measuring arm work volume. Furthermore, it is expected

that the more similar the measuring arm positions are,

when probing the refector points, to the ones used in the

identifcation, the closer the error results should be to the

ones shown in Table 5. Terefore, the points and positions

for evaluation must be diferent from the ones used in the

identifcation procedure. To illustrate this characteristic, in

this case two extra positions of the refector have been

considered as test points (Figure 7). For each one of these

new refector positions, 10 angle combinations have been

captured corresponding to the center positions of each one

of them, captured in the same captured conditions compare

to the rest of the points. Te nominal distance between

these two points, calculated as the Euclidean distance of the

multilaterated coordinates, was 492.7164 mm. Te distance

obtained, using the mean points expressed in the AACMM

reference systemof the 10 probed points of each point and the

identifed parameters, was 492.7695 mm, obtaining an error

in this case with respect to the nominal of 53 m, while the

maximum standard deviation for the two probed points has

been calculated in the coordinate of the frst probed point,

with a value of 0.1426 mm for all the 10 captured positions.

It is therefore possible to conclude that the obtained error

value for the identifed parameter set can be generalizable to

Te Scientifc World Journal 9

Table 5: Quality indicators for the identifed values of model parameters over 21 SMR locations (105 AACMM positions).

Distance error (mm) 2 by retrorefector point (mm)

Maximum 0.11824 Maximum 0.20644

Causing dist. 212 Causing point 4

Medium 0.04825 Causing coord. Y

Medium 0.11545

500

1000

1500

3000

3500

2000

1800

1600

1400

1200

Identifcation points

Evaluation points

X

(

m

m

)

Z

(

m

m

)

Y (mm)

(a)

2000

0

2000

4000

2000

4000

1000

500

0

500

1000

X

(

m

m

)

Z

(

m

m

)

LT

1

LT

2

LT

3

LT

4

Y

(m

m

)

(b)

Figure 7: Points captured by LTs. (a) Multilaterated points used as nominal data for the parameter identifcation procedure; (b) points

captured by each LT.

0 50 100 150 200 250

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Distance number

R

a

n

g

e

(

m

)

Figure 8: Range of each distance considered in the identifcation

process. Each data represents the diference between the maximum

and minimum values of each distance calculated with the measure-

ments made by the four LTs.

the evaluated work volume. For this reason, the assessment

of more evaluation positions diferent from the one used

as an example is recommended when increasing the work

volume to be identifed. Te ideal is to obtain error values

always below the identifcation maximum error, although

it is possible to set an acceptable error percentage above

the obtained maximum error in order to set a characteristic

value of the measuring arm global error according to a less

restrictive criterion.

7. Conclusions

In this work, a novel calibration technique for parameter

kinematic identifcation of an AACMM is presented. Tis

calibration technique is based on an objective function that

considers the volumetric error and repeatability by means

of the distance errors and the standard deviation of physical

probed points, respectively. Moreover, a new procedure to

obtain nominal gauge values for this calibration technique

is carried out. Tis new procedure is based on the mea-

surements of a calibrated spherical retrorefector with 4 LTs.

Although the error range of this type of measuring instru-

ments has an order of magnitude similar to the AACMM

for this work distances, the use of multilateration techniques

can be of great help to reduce the measurement uncertainty,

taking as nominal data only the measurements of the LTs.

By combining the aforementioned measurements and afer

10 Te Scientifc World Journal

1000

0

1000

1000

0

1000

1500

1000

500

0

500

1000

1500

X

(m

m

)

Z

(

m

m

)

Y

(m

m

)

(a)

X

(

m

m

)

Z

(

m

m

)

200

400

600

800

1000

200

0

200

400

600

800

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Y

(m

m

)

(b)

Figure 9: Points captured by the AACMM. (a) Nominal kinematic parameters; (b) identifed kinematic parameters.

the described optimization procedure, is possible to obtain

points that can be used as nominal points, in this case

materializing distances between them for their use in the

AACMMparameter identifcationprocedure. Eventhoughin

this work 4 LTs have been used to eliminate the coordinate

sign ambiguity of the multilaterated points, it is possible

to realize this procedure using only 3 LTs by making sure

that all of the points have the same sign with respect to the

multilateration reference system. Tis way, in the cases when

access to this type of measuring instruments is available, it

is possible to carry out an AACMM identifcation procedure

without the use of common physical gauges used in this type

of procedures.

Finally, the simplifcation of the calibration procedure

presented in this work can be achieved by applying sequential

multilarization; thus the use of only one LT is needed to carry

out the adapted procedure, with the aim of reducing costs.

Conflict of Interests

Te authors declare that there is no confict of interests

regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] A. Piratelli-Filho and G. R. Lesnau, Virtual spheres gauge for

coordinate measuring arms performance test, Measurement,

vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 236244, 2010.

[2] K. Shimojima, R. Furutani, K. Takamasu, and K. Araki, Te

estimation method of uncertainty of articulated coordinate

measuring machine, in Proceedings of the IEEE International

Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 411415, Dubrovnik,

Croatia, 2002.

[3] H. Hamana, M. Tominaga, M. Ozaki, and R. Furutani,

Calibration of articulated arm coordinate measuring machine

considering measuring posture, International Journal of

Automation Technology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 109114, 2011.

[4] J. Sadek, K. Ostrowska, and A. Gska, Modeling and identif-

cation of errors of coordinate measuring arms with the use of a

metrological model, Measurement, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 667679,

2013.

[5] J. Sadek, K. Ostrowska, and K. Gacek, Kinematic metrological

model of the coordinate measuring arm (MCMA), in Pro-

ceedings of the 19th IMEKO World Congress Fundamental and

Applied Metrology, pp. 19881992, Lisbon, Portugal, 2009.

[6] J. Denavit and R. S. Hartenberg, A kinematic notation for

lower-pair mechanisms based on matrices, Transactions of

ASME-Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 215221,

1955.

[7] M. Miroir, Y. Nguyen, J. Szewczyk, O. Sterkers, and A. Bozorg

Grayeli, Design, kinematic optimization, and evaluation of a

teleoperated system for middle ear microsurgery, Te Scientifc

World Journal, vol. 2012, Article ID 907372, 19 pages, 2012.

[8] T. W. Hsu and L. J. Everett, Identifcation of the kinematic

parameters of a robot manipulator for positional accuracy

improvement, in Proceedings of the Computation in Engineering

Conference, pp. 263267, Boston, Mass, USA, August 1985.

[9] B. W. Mooring, Te efect of joint axis misalignment on

robot positioning accuracy, in Proceedings of the Computers in

engineering: International Computers in Engineering Conference

and Exhibit, pp. 151155, Chicago, Ill, USA, August 1983.

[10] H. Stone, A. Sanderson, and C. Neuman, Armsignature identi-

fcation, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on

Robotics and Automation, pp. 4148, San Francisco, Calif, USA,

April 1986.

[11] L. J. Everett and A. H. Suryohadiprojo, A study of kinematic

models for forward calibration of manipulators, in Proceedings

of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automa-

tion, pp. 798800, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, April 1988.

Te Scientifc World Journal 11

[12] J. Chen and L. M. Chao, Positioning error analysis for robot

manipulators with all rotary joints, IEEE Journal of Robotics

and Automation, vol. RA-3, no. 6, pp. 539545, 1987.

[13] A. C. Majarena, J. Santolaria, D. Samper, and J. J. Aguilar,

An overview of kinematic and calibration models using inter-

nal/external sensors or constraints to improve the behavior of

spatial parallel mechanisms, Sensors, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 10256

10297, 2010.

[14] I. Kova c and A. Frank, Testing and calibration of coordinate

measuring arms, Precision Engineering, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 90

99, 2001.

[15] D. Zheng, C. Du, and Y. Hu, Researchonoptimal measurement

area of fexible coordinate measuring machines, Measurement,

vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 250254, 2012.

[16] K. Levenberg, A method for the solution of certain non-linear

problems in least squares, Quarterly of Applied Mathematics,

vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 164168, 1944.

[17] Q. Gao, J. Chen, L. Wang, S. Xu, and Y. Hou, Multiobjective

optimization design of a fractional order PID controller for

a gun control system, Te Scientifc World Journal, vol. 2013,

Article ID 907256, 8 pages, 2013.

[18] J. Santolaria, J. Aguilar, J. Yag ue, and J. Pastor, Kinematic

parameter estimation technique for calibration and repeata-

bility improvement of articulated arm coordinate measuring

machines, Precision Engineering, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 251268,

2008.

[19] Y. Koseki, T. Arai, K. Sugimoto, T. Takatuji, and M. Goto,

Design and accuracy evaluation of high-speed and high

precision parallel mechanism, in Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE

International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Part 1 (of

4), pp. 13401345, May 1998.

[20] A. Piratelli-Filho, F. H. T. Fernandes, and R. V. Arencibia,

Application of virtual spheres plate for AACMMs evaluation,

Precision Engineering, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 349355, 2012.

[21] Z. Wang, L. Mastrogiacomo, F. Franceschini, and P. Maropou-

los, Experimental comparison of dynamic tracking perfor-

mance of iGPS and laser tracker, International Journal of

Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 56, no. 14, pp. 205

213, 2011.

[22] C. Lin and J. Her, Calibrating the volumetric errors of a

precision machine by a laser tracker system, International

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 26, no. 11-

12, pp. 12551267, 2005.

[23] S. Aguado, D. Samper, J. Santolaria, and J. J. Aguilar, Identif-

cation strategy of error parameter in volumetric error compen-

sation of machine tool based on laser tracker measurements,

International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, vol. 53,

no. 1, pp. 160169, 2012.

[24] T. Takatsuji, M. Goto, A. Kirita, T. Kurosawa, and Y. Tanimura,

Te relationship between the measurement error and the

arrangement of laser trackers in laser trilateration, Measure-

ment Science and Technology, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 477483, 2000.

[25] D. F. Zhang, S. Rolt, and P. G. Maropoulos, Modelling and

optimization of novel laser multilateration schemes for high-

precision applications, Measurement Science and Technology,

vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 25412547, 2005.

[26] E. B. Hughes, A. Wilson, and G. N. Peggs, Design of a high-

accuracy CMM based on multi-lateration techniques, CIRP

Annals-Manufacturing Technology, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 391394,

2000.

[27] S. W. Kim, H. G. Rhee, and J. Y. Chu, Volumetric phase-

measuring interferometer for three-dimensional coordinate

metrology, Precision Engineering, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 205215,

2003.

[28] J. Santolaria, A. Brau, J. Velzquez, and J. J. Aguilar, A self-

centering active probing technique for kinematic parameter

identifcation and verifcation of articulated arm coordinate

measuring machines, Measurement Science and Technology,

vol. 21, no. 5, Article ID 055101, 2010.

[29] W. K. Kim, Y. K. Byun, and H. S. Cho, Closed-form forward-

position solution for a 6-DoF 3-PPSP parallel mechanism and

its implementation, International Journal of Robotics Research,

vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 8599, 2001.

[30] S. Aguado, J. Santolaria, D. Samper, and J. Aguilar, Infuence

of measurement noise and laser arrangement on measurement

uncertainty of laser tracker multilateration in machine tool

volumetric verifcation, Precision Engineering, vol. 37, pp. 929

943, 2013.

Submit your manuscripts at

http://www.hindawi.com

VLSI Design

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

International Journal of

Rotating

Machinery

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Journal of

Engineering

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Shock and Vibration

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Mechanical

Engineering

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Civil Engineering

Advances in

Acoustics and Vibration

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Electrical and Computer

Engineering

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Distributed

Sensor Networks

International Journal of

The Scientifc

World Journal

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Sensors

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Modelling &

Simulation

in Engineering

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Active and Passive

Electronic Components

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Chemical Engineering

International Journal of

Control Science

and Engineering

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Antennas and

Propagation

International Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Navigation and

Observation

International Journal of

Advances in

OptoElectronics

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Robotics

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

- Sensitivity Analysis of Bread Production at Anifowose Bakery Industry, Offa, NigeriaDiunggah olehIRJET Journal
- European Journal of Operational Research Volume 90 Issue 1 1996 [Doi 10.1016%2F0377-2217%2894%2900246-0] a.B.M. Zohrul Kabir; Ahmed S. Al-Olayan -- A Stocking Policy for Spare Part Provisioning UnderDiunggah olehapriliaratnaah
- 12-Introduction to Discrete OptimizationDiunggah olehRafał Dembowski
- Paper - Optimal Placement of PMUs Using Improved Tabu Search for Complete Observability and Out-Of-Step PredictionDiunggah olehAhmed Seddik
- Chapter13 - Agreggate PlanningDiunggah olehMarco Tulio
- 04237330Diunggah olehBrian Fox
- ESP Well Optimizer WorkflowDiunggah olehWilmer Arcos
- Power tunnels and penstocks_The economic re-examined - Fahlbusch.pdfDiunggah olehces.alexander.cv
- Modeling and Maximizing Customer EquityDiunggah olehffioriolli
- A Review and Critique on Integrated Production Distribution Planning Models and TechniquesDiunggah olehvundavilliravindra
- D1,L9 Linear Programming.pptDiunggah olehmokhtarppg
- IRJET-Optimisation of Draw-Bead Design in Sheet Metal Forming of an Asymmetric Part using RSM and LSDYNADiunggah olehIRJET Journal
- Economic Load Dispatch Problem with Valve – Point Effect Using a Binary Bat AlgorithmDiunggah olehIDES
- Teori Pit OptimalisasiDiunggah olehErland Prasetya
- A Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model for Advanced Earthwork Allocation PlanningDiunggah olehSenthil Kumar
- Assembly Line BalancingDiunggah olehArkady Hafizh Ramadhan
- ArticleDiunggah olehTunis Loulou
- LQR otimoDiunggah olehStefania Oliveira
- 4325-12263-1-PB.pdfDiunggah olehPrasad Raikar
- EE16.pdfDiunggah olehrobertovm2002
- Insenstive ControlDiunggah olehMohamed Berriri
- 4_checkpointingDiunggah olehJakub Sliacan
- 10.1109-WESCAN.1993.270580Diunggah olehali_moghimi_2455
- Node Positioning in ZigBee Network Using Trilateration MethodDiunggah olehGinanjar Suwasono
- OR ModelsDiunggah olehamul65
- reservoirDiunggah olehDeepak Chandran
- STUDY OF TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM BY MCD METHOD.Diunggah olehIJAR Journal
- 2014.1_Simulation_based_numerical_optimization_of_arc_welding_process_for_reduced_distortion_in_welded_structures.pdfDiunggah olehMahdi Elgolli
- SolverexrDiunggah olehnirmal kumar
- Technical ReportDiunggah olehrehoboath

- Ghidul_Solicitantului_M312_Versiunea_05_din_Martie_2011Diunggah olehFlorin Bostan
- Introducere in Senzori Si TraductoareDiunggah olehdaniliuc_daniel
- Lean Robotics White PaperDiunggah olehsourabhfbd
- Coordinate Systems and TransformationsDiunggah olehmlucian73
- ACM User GuideDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Robcad BrochureDiunggah olehWesley Said
- Traductoare de Pozitie Si DeplasareDiunggah olehP_adelin6274
- A Real-Time Tool Positioning Sensor for Machine-ToolsDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Vision II 24 SE - Instalare, intretinere (Manual tehnic).pdfDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Traductoare_PrincipiiDiunggah olehDaniela Repta
- Traductoare_PrincipiiDiunggah olehDaniela Repta
- 96f98eDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Raport de Cercetare 2005Diunggah olehmlucian73
- Presentation FlexTrack IRT501Diunggah olehmlucian73
- Presentation FlexTrack IRT501Diunggah olehmlucian73
- The Competitive Status of the UK Automotive IndustryDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Parker Hannifin a Winning HeritageDiunggah olehmlucian73
- IRBT X004 Data SheetDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Flexicell AnglaisDiunggah olehmlucian73
- IRB 5400 Process DatasheetDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Excellence in HemmingDiunggah olehmlucian73
- 3HXD7109-1 R8Diunggah olehmlucian73
- FlexTrack Flyer Rev11 GBDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Measuring the Cost of QualityDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Squareness Error Mapping of a Coordinate Measuring Machine Using a 2-Dimensional Reference ObjectDiunggah olehmlucian73
- DataSheetFlexPLP LinearDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Data Sheet Flex TrackDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Brochure Plastics LRDiunggah olehmlucian73
- Brochure Plastics LRDiunggah olehmlucian73

- learning in nonformal contexts.pdfDiunggah olehneviser23
- "Magnolia" Shooting DraftDiunggah olehOneEyed55
- General Notes on Absalom and Achitophel Through HobbesDiunggah olehtadmoroseboy
- The Adoration of ReDiunggah olehNabil Roufail
- Post Merger Integration EnDiunggah olehDalpreet Singh
- HermeneuticsDiunggah olehNazir
- Man-Machine Evaluation.... M-60 TankDiunggah olehcjnjr1
- Cunningham v. California, 127 S..pdfDiunggah olehburritoice
- Field Study 4Diunggah olehManiya Dianne Reyes
- Application Letter - JkmDiunggah olehIzZa Rivera
- Capítulo 23TippensDiunggah olehRodrigo Abarca
- Mps SystemDiunggah olehTathagata Bhattacharjee
- A-LEVEL-CHEMISTRY.pdfDiunggah olehPaida Heart
- AGENDA Workshop Passau June 10-12,2015 (2)Diunggah olehMarko Mahin
- Deep Space ChronicleDiunggah olehBob Andrepont
- 758250337.pdfDiunggah oleherbarium
- 2. Prose, Poetry, Nondetail & Grammer.docDiunggah olehpmtally
- Qd-cancerDiunggah olehIliasa Ilias
- Camera Shots and AnglesDiunggah olehAmy
- Book1Diunggah olehTrầnHoàngBách
- "A Face for God", by Maria Clara BingemerDiunggah olehConvivium Press
- Chemical Engineering, BSc .pdfDiunggah olehCássio Soares
- class1_8822.pdfDiunggah olehVisitantP
- D F TDiunggah olehArpit Varshney
- Ea 4 16 g Rev00 December 2003 RevDiunggah olehBrandon Erickson
- ExtEngineering MathematicsDiunggah olehUmashankar Nadig
- Ronaldo Romero_CV_update1.docDiunggah olehRonaldo Romero
- Course DescriptionsDiunggah olehRoberto Hoffman
- Working Capital FinanceDiunggah olehmir_umaramin
- Acquiring and Retaining Customers in UK BanksDiunggah olehabalasa54